disciplinary handbook: volume v - Supreme Court - State of Ohio

Case Summaries- 15Archer, Northwest Ohio Bar Assn. v.129 Ohio St.3d 204, 2011-Ohio-3142. Decided 7/5/2011.Respondent failed to pay unemployment and income taxes and failed to withhold certain money for hisemployee. Respondent received a public reprimand in 1993. Respondent failed to file the appropriateforms and pay unemployment taxes as required by Ohio law for his employee. Respondent also retainedlocal, state, and federal taxes from his employee, but converted them for his personal use instead ofremitting them to the appropriate government agency. Respondent‘s conduct caused a delay in hissecretary receiving unemployment benefits. Respondent eventually filed the necessary paperwork, andpaid all taxes and penalties. This conduct violated DR 1-102(A)(4)/ Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c) (conductinvolving dishonest, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), and DR 1-102(A)(6)/ Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(h)(conduct that adversely reflects on the fitness to practice law). In aggravation, respondent had a priordisciplinary record, engaged in a pattern of misconduct, and harmed a vulnerable employee. BCGDProc.Reg. 10(B)(1)(a), (d), and (h). The board also noted that respondent allowed his malpracticeinsurance to lapse without informing his clients, in violation of Prof.Cond.R. 1.4(c), and found that as anaggravating factor. In mitigation, respondent paid money sanctions for late payment of taxes,cooperated in the disciplinary process, and presented evidence of good character. BCGD Proc.Reg.10(B)(2)(c), (d), (e). The board rejected a finding that respondent conduct was not driven by a dishonestor selfish motive. Respondent presented testimony of severe health issues that inhibited his ability to paythe taxes, but did not present any evidence of it. The parties stipulated to a one-year suspension with 6months stayed; the board rejected this stipulation and instead recommends a one-year suspension. TheCourt adopted the board‘s findings of fact and conclusions of law. Upon reviewing Abood (2004), Large(2009), and Bruner (2003), the Court adopted the board‘s recommended sanction of a one-yearsuspension.Rules Violated: Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c), 8.4(h); DR 1-102(A)(4), 1-102(A)(6)Aggravation: (a), (d), (h)Mitigation: (c), (d), (e)Prior Discipline: YES Procedure/ Process Issues: NO Criminal Conduct: NOPublic Official: NO Sanction: One-year suspension